[World Leader Pretend]

FYI: OEM copies of XP home edition SP2 are for sale on NewEgg for $86.00.

Chucker: yeah, my first post was a bit fuzzy, but I figured people would get the gist of things..

[chucker]

Ugh, Home Edition. I don't understand how Microsoft can even sell that shit without a guilty conscience.

[Hobbes]

Originally Posted by rasmits Macs have a "games mode" now! Wait 'till I tell all my friends!

Exactly.

[Wickers]

Originally Posted by chucker Ugh, Home Edition. I don't understand how Microsoft can even sell that shit without a guilty conscience.

Considering the price difference and the feature difference. In some cases it makes much more sense to go with home over pro.

Not everyone is running a dualie and needing to connect to their corporate network all the while keeping keeping the kids from installing software on their accounts.

For 'home', single user, office and internet tasks it fits the bill. And when you are doing a system build for a client the lower OEM price of home often means a price tag that closes the sale.

[Moogs]

Originally Posted by alcimedes I think this is a move that will increase Apple's sales tremendously. If their marketshare goes from 5% to 10%, I promise you everyone will continue to port and write software for Mac OS. (big budget games being the exception) The nice part about all this is at the end of the day, people who *couldn't* buy a Mac before because of one or two required Windows-only apps. can now purchase without any worries. I think this will drive total sales up quite a bit, which at the end of the day is what keeps developers developing.

You are correct. I have met / encountered many people in the last five years who said "yah... you know they're really nice, but I can't afford to buy one unless I can run my most important programs on it, and there's no Mac version." This will -without any question- boost sales quite a bit across the board.

Also: those who are yapping about Adobe giving up Mac, please stop and re-evaluate how much you know vs. how much you guess. Wildly. Aside from the obvious, which is that BC requires Mac users to purchase a second, $285 OS (OS X only costs $129 - do we really think people will be anxious to spend twice as much on Windows? I don't.), major developers aren't going to a) throw away the huge investment they've already made in the Mac platform (that includes people and capital, not just code); and b) assume that every Mac user now has a copy of Windows running on their machine. This is going to be a fairly niche thing IMO. The majority of Mac users won't use it on a regular basis.

Regardless, running an app in OS X still maintains the same advantages of stability, interface and other factors that Windows does not have. Fear of viruses, impatience with frequent rebooting and the like will deter most users as well.

This is only a huge deal to geeks like us, and people who want to tinker with a Mac, but are really Windows-first users.

[Wickers]

Paging torifile; status report?

[chucker]

Originally Posted by Wickers Considering the price difference and the feature difference. In some cases it makes much more sense to go with home over pro.

That would be the case...

Not everyone is running a dualie and needing to connect to their corporate network all the while keeping keeping the kids from installing software on their accounts.

That, too, would be the case.

For 'home', single user, office and internet tasks it fits the bill.

And so would this.

Except for the crucial fact that the entire security architecture is simply severely broken in Home.

[Wickers]

Originally Posted by chucker Except for the crucial fact that the entire security architecture is simply severely broken in Home.

Well, I don't see the average single home-office web serfer in need of EFS... directory/file level access control is also not as important with a single user. In addition, if we look at security in general, you should be using 3rd party apps (an alt browser, alt firewall**, more then one anti-spyware app, and antivirus) in both home and pro... most if not all of which come on the free side and do a great job.

**also note that outgoing services can be limited at the firewall level.

I mean, home or pro, you still have to follow the golden rule of once physical access has been obtained to the computer, security goes out the window. If someone wants your data, and has physical access, consider it stolen.

Unless there is something I am missing?

[chucker]

Originally Posted by Wickers Well, I don't see the average single home-office web serfer in need of EFS...

True, they aren't.

if we look at security in general, you should be using 3rd party apps (an alt browser, alt firewall**, more then one anti-spyware app, and antivirus) in both home and pro... most if not all of which come on the free side and do a great job.

I couldn't disagree more. You're basically stating that Windows's built-in means of protection are useless, and, worse, that users should simply accept this without criticism.

SP2 made some advances in this area, but the state of the union in this regard is still nothing short of pathetic.

The fact that installing third party software remedies this is irrelevant; such mandatory maintenance/security functionality should simply be available from the OS vendor these days.

I mean, home or pro, you still have to follow the golden rule of once physical access has been obtained to the computer, security goes out the window. If someone wants your data, and has physical access, consider it stolen.

Well, yes. That's a different matter.

Unless there is something I am missing?

What I was actually getting at are limitations such as:
1) difficulties using XP Home with an account that isn't an admin. All users are admins per default, and life is m ade hard for you if you try and change that. Note that, unlike on OS X, an admin user has quite a few privileges without additional confirmation. Yes, Vista changes this, but that's not the point.
2) the near-impossibility of locking down access to certain directories, due to the crippled security UI (regarding ACLs, for instance). No, this isn't something the user should have to care about, but since Windows's default settings in this regard are problematic, this becomes all the more aggravating as, unlike in Pro, there is little in Home that can be done about it.
3) likewise, the same for SMB/CIFS-based sharing of folders.

It's a bit of an "all or nothing" OS. I wouldn't recommend anyone using it without a hardware firewall (NAT/masquerading should suffice, though).

[rollercoaster375]

Originally Posted by chucker Well yes, of course; I just wanted to point out that it was misleading. When you add Windows, the price increases to at least 2 grand. Aside from that, the two are very nicely comparable indeed.

And a 2 GHz Core Duo will beat the crap out of a 2.8 Ghz Pentium D... Compromises must me made

Originally Posted by World Leader Pretend FYI: OEM copies of XP home edition SP2 are for sale on NewEgg for $86.00.

Will OEM copies work? If they will, that's worth looking into... But for some reason I didn't think that was possible... *shrug*

[chucker]

Originally Posted by rollercoaster375 And a 2 GHz Core Duo will beat the crap out of a 2.8 Ghz Pentium D... Compromises must me made

That depends. The Pentium D has a faster bus, whereas the Core Duo has more efficient cores. So, a comparison between the two isn't that easy to make. Note also that the Pentium D has EM64T, which the Core Duo won't until the next generation.

Will OEM copies work? If they will, that's worth looking into... But for some reason I didn't think that was possible... *shrug*

As long as they're not restore CDs, yes, they'll work just fine. You might even be able to save a few bucks getting an SP1 (or non-SP) CD and slipstreaming* it yourself.

*) That's what Microsoft calls the process of applying a service pack, then re-burning the install media.

[Wyatt]

Originally Posted by rollercoaster375 Will OEM copies work? If they will, that's worth looking into... But for some reason I didn't think that was possible... *shrug*

That's about the only option you've got other than a boxed copy that costs twice as much and adds nothing. I've got a System Builder copy I can try out, if somebody wants to donate an Intel iMac or MBP.

[torifile]

Originally Posted by Wickers Paging torifile; status report?

Sorry. Had to grill some chicken and restore my backup installation. Damn it takes a long time to copy over 125 gigs (times 2 - once for the backup and once for the restore). Anyway, I didn't get an option at initial installation for anything but starting up XP. I'm going to try restarting with the option key down and see if I can select the ubuntu disc. I'll let you know shortly.

[Wickers]

chucker,

I understand your point, but what does that have to do with the 'case' I presented?

Every note you posted is very applicable and of concern when it comes to a system with more then one user, or a system on a larger network of users. Non of them really apply to a single user system.

A single user would not need to restrict access to directories from other users as there are no other users on the system.

Originally Posted by chucker I couldn't disagree more. You're basically stating that Windows's built-in means of protection are useless, and, worse, that users should simply accept this without criticism. SP2 made some advances in this area, but the state of the union in this regard is still nothing short of pathetic. The fact that installing third party software remedies this is irrelevant; such mandatory maintenance/security functionality should simply be available from the OS vendor these days.

... I never said the 'protection' built-in to windows is useless. I'm simply pointing out that any security differences (in regards to that spectrum slice of security) between home and pro are a moot point because currently better tools for the job can be found for free with various third party sources.

[Luca]

That Dell's GeForce 6800 will kick the pants off the iMac's X1600 Pro. The processors are probably pretty equal... the Pentium D has a much higher clock speed, but it's not as powerful per clock. But then, of course, you have the "intangibles" (or maybe they're not so intangible) of the built-in iSight, the wonderful form factor, the included wireless, and OS X.

As for dual booting, I don't see why XP Home would be too bad for it. If you're just running a few programs and games, there shouldn't be much difference. And yes, OEM copies from NewEgg should work since they're not tied to a particular machine.

[chucker]

Originally Posted by Wickers chucker, I understand your point, but what does that have to do with the 'case' I presented? Every note you posted is very applicable and of concern when it comes to a system with more then one user, or a system on a larger network of users. Non of them really apply to a single user system. A single user would not need to restrict access to directories from other users as there are no other users on the system.

Well, Windows XP is intended as a "family" system, hence features such as fast user switching or the simplified login screen. It's not (primarily) a single-user OS. In which case, yes, it does matter.

... I never said the 'protection' built-in to windows is useless. I'm simply pointing out that any security differences (in regards to that spectrum slice of security) between home and pro are a moot point because currently better tools for the job can be found for free with various third party sources.

And I disagree.

[torifile]

Wickers,

I started up the computer with the option key after getting OS X and XP installed. I got a boot screen that had a CD icon:


You may not be able to tell, but under the CD it says "Windows". I chose it anyway.

I got to the install screen and it started.


I didn't let it go past loading the initial drivers, etc. But I was able to select my language and keyboard layout. After that, I aborted the install. But I had no trouble at all booting to it by holding the option key and selecting the disc. Looks like bootcamp will work for Linux too.

[Wickers]

Sweet!!!!

[torifile]

Originally Posted by Wickers Sweet!!!!

I wish I could do the install on an external HD so I can make sure it works. I'd hate to get your hopes up but I'm not willing to go through the reinstall process again after having done it no fewer than 3 times for OS X and XP in the past month. Yeesh.

[tacvbo83]

I will probably do it if it can be installed in an external drive. Too bad Apple has not said anything about that.

[Partial]

the 6800 crushes the x1600. Spanks it like a disobidient catholic school girl.

[trevo]

My conclusion: I think Apple is walking a fine line with Mac OS developers and it's success, you know... you don't want to push it too far. However, I don't think Apple would of let this out of the bag if they weren't sure of their developers. I'm not worried!

I think it would of been safer to market Boot Camp separately, instead of being a built-in feature of Leopard.

[Partial]

has anyone run hl2 at native res with a macbook pro doing this? I want to know how it runs!!

[ghoti]

Matt, please ... "of" is not a verb, "would of" does not make any sense. I hate being a grammar nazi, but this is just so wrong ...

[Wickers]

torifile,

Consider your test blogged, dugg, and you avec applenova credited.

[trevo]

Originally Posted by ghoti but this is just so wrong ...

After you have finished vomiting can we get back to the topic at hand?

[torifile]

Originally Posted by Wickers torifile, Consider your test blogged, dugg, and you avec applenova credited.

Screw all that! Gimme some rep points you stingy bastard!

[torifile]

Originally Posted by tensdanny38 has anyone run hl2 at native res with a macbook pro doing this? I want to know how it runs!!

I'm downloading the demo now. How do I measure framerates?

[Wickers]

Originally Posted by torifile Screw all that! Gimme some rep points you stingy bastard!

/me *smacks forehead*

Of course!

[MCQ]

Originally Posted by torifile I'm downloading the demo now. How do I measure framerates?

Hit tilde key during gameplay to bring up console, and type in cl_showfps 1

I don't remember if you have to check something in the options/settings before you're able to access the console.